Morality

It was a cold desert night in Muscat. My house helper had just come back into the house after putting out the garbage. She was evidently shaken.

“I saw a maid outside who has run away from her employer. She tried to go to the Embassy, but they asked her to come back tomorrow morning. She is sitting outside near the garbage, scared that the police will catch her.”

I remember my heart racing as I listened to her. There was a flood of emotions, from concern for the poor woman’s safety to empathy for her plight and a surging desire to help. But the action that would naturally follow was dampened by the voice of fear. Who was she? Why had she run away? Would I get into trouble for trying to help?

I looked to Amelia, but she seemed to harbor none of my fears.

“Shall I take a cup of tea to her?” she asked with urgency.

She was showing me the way to my humanity, and I followed her lead. It didn’t take long before Amelia and I had prepared a bag of goodies, along with a warm blanket, and we went out to find the woman.

I was not prepared for what I saw. For there, in the stillness of the night, sat a lonely figure, shriveled into nothingness, as though wishing to blend in with the garbage cans out on the curb. Her scared little face, her shivering body, and her helplessness called out to me. If I walked back into the safety of my home, I’d be leaving my soul out to rot with the trash.

I brought her inside our garden, gave her a place on the patio lounger, and reassured her that she was safe there. Although she barely spoke English, Ruqaya’s relief was writ large on her face as she shrouded herself with the blanket and settled into the lounger with a deep sigh of contentment.

Fear as a Stimulus for Action

Amelia and I returned to the house, beaming with relief. But as I walked into my room, I could not help but compare the accumulated excesses all around me to the one tattered bag that contained all of Ruqaya’s worldly belongings. I looked at my warm and inviting bed and thought of the shriveled woman outside. Would she be able to sleep out in the cold? What if she were to get hypothermia? What if something terrible were to happen to her out in my garden? It was the voice of fear again, booming loudly in my head. Just as it had tried to stop me from acting a while ago, it was now urging me to do so.

I went to my twins. They were in bed and almost asleep. I told them about Ruqaya, about my wish to bring her into the guest room, and about my dual fear for her safety and for our own. Their concerns were naturally as selfish as mine had earlier been. They had not made the human connection and were spared the inner turmoil. I listened to them, and as I did so, I heard my own negativity bias at play. By calming their fears, I was able to rise above my own to come up with a plan that ensured both safety and compassion.

It is incredible how much goodness we all have within us when we let go of the exaggerated fears for our own safety. Our collective excitement to help a woman in need brought out the love that we perhaps save for a lucky few. We brought her into the guest room and gave her hot food in bed. When she was finished eating, we explained that we’d lock the door from the outside until morning. Ruqaya looked around with wonder-struck eyes. She kept repeating two words that still ring in my ears, “You goot.”

Resonating Compassion

Once out of her room, it was impossible to just go off to bed. We were on a high, too full with emotion and yet too drained to speak. We all teared up, hugged each other, and stayed that way for a long time. I’m not sure what we felt, for there were no words to describe it. Perhaps it was a moment of transcendence. In our compassionate act, we seemed to have moved up together on what Jonathan Haidt has called the third dimension of social cognition, that of divinity. This was a form of positivity resonance as Barbara Fredrickson describes in her book, Love 2.0.

The experience taught me a lesson about fear. It’s not only the dark and wicked emotion that we all wish would be gone because it seems excessive compared to its survival value in the relative safety of the 21st century. Like all emotions, it has an upside, for it possesses a certain goal orientation that urges us to act. When we move beyond our own selfish worlds, fear can give rise to moral emotions such as pro-social anger.

McFarland and colleagues have created a scale called Identification with All Humanity (IWAH) scale. People who score high on this scale are more concerned about global issues. They work to combat world hunger, save our environment, and address human rights violations. The researchers were surprised to find that high scores on the IWAH scale are often associated with high scores on the personality trait of neuroticism, which is characterized by fear, anxiety and negativity. “We cannot hazard a guess,” they write, “as why those who agree with items such as ‘I would feel afraid if I had to travel in bad weather conditions’ and ‘I sometimes can’t help worrying about little things’ identify more strongly than others with all humanity.”

I can see the association between the IWAH and fear. If not for my fear, I may never have taken compassionate action. I may never have experienced that indescribable state of oneness with the world. I may never have witnessed my children’s ability to rise to their own goodness, nor helped them feel it in their hearts. I need to learn to differentiate between fear’s survival value and its more pro-social value that originates in compassion. It may not always be easy in the moment. But suppressing fear altogether would reduce my humanity.

Fear is like the voice of a little child, much like my own that night, often misguided, often overstated, but sometimes, just sometimes, pointing the way to the soul. In those moments, we find meaning in uncovering who we are, and purpose in giving ourselves back to the world. I may be getting carried away (and perhaps that’s the sneaky side of fear), but for now, I’m ready to believe that one night of being truly human is worth the many moments when fear distresses me and even the few when it actually stops me in my tracks.

McFarland, S., Webb, M., & Brown, D. (2012). All humanity is my ingroup: A measure and studies of identification with all humanity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103(5), 830-853. Abstract.

Author’s note: This is a continuation of the reflection started yesterday on judgment and open-mindedness as a character strength on the fence between heart and head.

While Lizzy and my other students study history formally, all of us have an opportunity to find examples of paragons of the strength of open-mindedness and judgment. The film, Selma, about Martin Luther King Jr. and the march from Selma to Montgomery in 1965, is an opportunity to reflect upon and celebrate the virtue of open-mindedness and judgment.

David Oyelowo portrays all of King’s humanity as he struggles to balance his conviction for civil rights with a desire to do no harm and to promote non-violence. Ava duVerney, the film’s director, shows us an example of the strength of judgment and a conviction for open-mindedness against the backdrop of courage and a fight for equality in citizenship.

Martin Luther King Jr. had difficult decisions to make both personally and for his community during the events of the Selma to Montgomery march. Interestingly, King did not walk in the first attempt over the Selma Bridge on March 7, 1965. However, this comes across as a judgment call, not an act of cowardice. Given the outcome of the day, now known as Bloody Sunday, King’s strategic decision to stay behind was potent. Had he been physically harmed, he would have been unable to lobby for the protection he ultimately won from Lyndon Baines Johnson and the Federal Government.

In his fight for freedom and his mission for open-mindedness, Bloody Sunday was not the only moment in the Selma-to-Montgomery march when King exercised exemplary judgment. On March 9th, King and other civil rights activists walked over the Edmund Pettus Bridge again. Known as Turn around Tuesday, on this day King once again exercised judgment and restraint to further the cause and protect those who were with him. King did not create a repeat of the violence that occurred on Bloody Sunday, nor did he violate the court order stating the march could not proceed. Instead, leading approximately 2,500 people across the bridge, organizing a short prayer session and then leading his supporters back into Selma, King exercised judgment that likely preserved lives and certainly generated more tactical publicity that helped many Americans become increasingly open-minded for supporting universal civil rights.

King’s conviction not only made him a leader, but the Nobel Peace Prize he won, for his doctrine of non-violence and his furthering human rights, demonstrate the depth of his purpose regarding open-mindedness. The thoughtfulness of his actions as he led those who stood beside him is a testament to his good judgment. At times, difficult decisions led to judgments with painful consequences (Bloody Sunday) and required more strategy and sacrifice (Turn Around Tuesday) than one may have imagined or than King would have most liked. The film artfully depicts the power and challenges of the strength of open-mindedness and judgment. By heralding King as its champion, drawing comparisons both to Malcolm X and George Wallace, and finally, causing us to reflect on difficult topics and hard won victories, the film exemplifies the virtue of open-mindedness and its sometimes perplexing twin, judgment.

Other Paragons on Film

Similarly, I suspect the films Mandela: Long Walk to Freedom and Gandhi also highlight excellent models of the strength of open-mindedness and judgment. Nowadays, King, Mandela, and Gandhi are all considered remarkable heroes because of their desire to further ideals of open-mindedness while working for the greater good of humanity. In modern society, it is hard to conceive of these three men as anything other than heroic. When I teach about these leaders, my students come away with the perception that these were noble men who used profound judgment fighting for worthy causes that perpetuated open-minded ideals.

Yet ironically, we must remember that at the time Gandhi, King, and Mandela were leading people in struggles for ideas of equality, there were those who did not share their views. Remember the notion I used to open this reflection on open-mindedness and judgment: “One man’s hero is another man’s terrorist.” To their adversaries, our modern heroes were terrorists; all three men were sent to prison for their controversial beliefs and actions. While it may be difficult for us now to envision them as terrorists, particularly because they advocated for a greater open-minded tolerance, we cannot forget that in their lifetimes, their ideologies were considered threatening for many.

* * * * * * * *

Where Does That Leave Us?

According to Edmund Burke, “Those who don’t know history are doomed to repeat it.” By teaching moral reasoning instead of moral education, we abdicate our responsibility to help children develop the character strength of open-mindedness and judgment for themselves. These virtues must be learned by example and emotional connection. Viewing Selma is an excellent exercise to develop, contextualize, and build open-mindedness and judgment by watching an exemplar of the character virtue.

Trying to reason our way though the ambiguities of our modern world can be a minefield. When we teach virtue, emotion, and empathy, and when we help people learn how to align them with open-mindedness and good judgment, we build toward a more tempered and peaceful world.

“I believe that this turn from character to quandary was a profound mistake, for two reasons. First it weakens morality and limits its scope. Where the ancients saw virtue and character at work in everything a person does, our modern conception confines morality to a set of situations that arise for each person only a few times in any given week: tradeoffs between self interest and the interest of others. … The second problem with the turn to moral reasoning is that it relies on bad psychology. Many moral education efforts since the 1970s take the rider off of the elephant and train him how to solve problems on his own. … Then class ends, the rider gets back on the elephant, and nothing changes at recess.” pp. 164-165.

My paternal grandmother was known for her infectious sense of humor. It is rumored that when she was young, her peels of laughter rang in the streets of her little neighborhood. She lived with us when I was growing up, and I remember her as my constant partner in mirth. She connected to my childlike sense of humor as naturally as she did to grown-up wit. When my husband-to-be proposed to me years later, she was a strong advocate for the match, her conviction based on the fact that he laughed a lot, hence would keep me happy.

What Good Comes from Humor?

Though illiterate, Dadima had a sharp insight into the workings of the mind. Decades later, I now study through science what she believed through intuition. From calming the cardiovascular system and improving depressive symptoms, to enhancing relationships and providing a greater purpose in life, humor has been shown to be an primary contributor to a well-lived life.

Research shows humor to be an indispensable trait for effective leadership, not only as a de-stressor in challenging times but as a promoter of workplace morale. Even being a parent is less bumpy when humor joins the ride. Mothers with cheery dispositions are able to move through the flow of family chaos in a stable manner, thus contributing to the development of a secure attachment in their children. Marriages are shown to be stronger when partners can appreciate the lighter side of life.

Other studies have demonstrated the effects of humor on recovery from bereavement. Humor may help individuals find perspective on their loss thus leading to less depression and a greater purpose in life. Certain therapy models, such as laughter yoga, encourage laughter to calm the stress response and perhaps even lead to a mystical experience of transcendence.

The centrality of humor in our lives is reflected in the ritualized roles within societies of jesters and comedians. Across time and cultures, making people laugh has played an important part in society, from the YuSze of imperial China to the court jesters of medieval Europe, from the stupidus of ancient Rome to the stand-ups in Improv Comedy Clubs.

Yet, while intended to make people laugh, humor can also bring tears of irritation or outbursts of anger. I am a regular witness to my daughter’s desperate cries for help over her teenage brother’s idea of jokes. We all watched the unfortunate events at Charlie Hebdo a few weeks ago. What is it about humor that can give rise to the most extreme form of moral emotions, from empathy and compassion and to fury and contempt?

Once Upon a Time

The answer may lie in the evolution of humor itself. Although even non-human primates engaged in social play, it was with the development of language that humans began to enjoy laughing and telling jokes. Humor is likely the result of a profound transition in the evolution of the brain, the emergence of consciousness.

Consciousness allowed us to create a coherent narrative of our history, with a lived past and an anticipated future. With the ability to look into the future came too the realization of impending dangers and our eventual demise. This not only infused life with fear, it also created the desire to beat biological existence and find meaning by belonging to something more eternal than the finite self. Meaning provided the stability that the emotional upheaval of life did not, and humor allowed us to move past the chaos of constant change by focusing on the larger perspective and seeing the absurdity of most of our insignificant worries.

With consciousness too emerged the self that existed within the framework of other people. Morality and culture evolved to allow for peaceful existence within the social structures that were key to our survival. Humor built relationships within tribes and strengthened in-group bonds, often at the expense of inter-group relationships.

Today, however, our tribe is slightly larger than the couple of hundred people in our ancestors’ times. We live a global existence and our sense of humor has to take the sensitivities and cultures of 7 billion people into account if we are indeed to thrive as a humanity. This is not always easy, and yet it is essential.

Other People Matter

So what are we to do? Chris Peterson’s short and sweet motto may be just the reminder we need. ‘Other People Matter’ guides us back to the essence of humor. Laughing at another’s expense disconnects us from our human values and lowers us on what Jonathan Haidt calls the dimension of divinity.

In our inter-connected world, we need to build other-focused strengths that take all cultures and traditions into account. Joshua Greene stresses the importance of connecting to one’s own individual experience with another’s pain and of exposing ourselves to cultural experiences so as to build empathy. Jonathan Haidt calls for greater perspective, humility and a general acceptance and appreciation of all moral matrices.

Perhaps the focus on the other will also help my son develop his budding career. I may remind my young comedian that a joke ceases to be a joke when it affects the sensitivities of the person who witnesses it, and that the success of any stand-up depends on his ability to refine an effective act that is appropriate for different audiences in different settings, depending on tastes, traits and temperament. Strutting around with boxers over his head or socks hanging off his ears may not be the most appropriate form of humor when his twin sister is trying to solve a complicated math equation. Until he manages to build social intelligence and a more coherent act, I may warn him to simply stop when he finds that the other person is not with him. Trying to clarify the humor is the worst form of fun and leads to the most desperate cries for help. E. B. White, the great New Yorker humorist, once observed that explaining humor is a bit like dissecting a frog: “It can be done, but the subject tends to die in the process.”

I may also help my daughter build her own sense of humor by encouraging her to nurture her imagination. I may remind her of her contagious peels of laughter at her brother’s attempts at comedy not too long ago, and how they enhanced both their happiness and their relationship. Nurturing the kid in her and enabling her to appreciate the absurd and the unexpected will undoubtedly fuel her imagination and contribute to her growth.

A good life is the synchronized dance of hedonic and eudaimonic happiness, for at the end of the day, all we want is to be happy and live meaningful lives. Although life may simply be a meaningless ride that we try and cloak with a fulfilling purpose, humor allows us to laugh at the insignificance of most things in the vast flow of human experience and yet connect to what we find truly important.

Dadima’s memories are filled with the smiles she spread. Her instincts about my husband were right for he fills our days with much laughter and joy. In life and after death, we will be known for the way we made others feel. Happy beats unhappy any day.

When my son was in middle school he argued about everything. Everything. No perceived injustice or imagined grievance, great or small, was off limits.

I understand the stages of adolescent development. I understand that it is, in the words of George Vaillant, a “self-limiting disorder” that we go through and grow out of. But the words of scholars and counselors offer little solace when trying to navigate life with a middle schooler. So I did what any other parent soaked in positive psychology would do: I had him take the Values in Action inventory to identify his strengths of character. (It is at this point in the story that my children call me a nerd.)

Andy’s two highest strengths were fairness and courage. No wonder he seemed to fight about everything.

Fairness is one of the virtues most valued in our culture. According to Park, Peterson, and Seligman, it is the second most prevalent character strength, behind only kindness.

According to Money, Hillenbrand, and Camara, it is one of only five strengths said to be a “high match” with the demands of work. The full list includes fairness, honesty, judgment, perspective, and zest. We want fair judges and police, fair bosses and parents. When negotiating business deals or legislative policy, pleas to fairness soften the other’s demands.

Lounsbury and colleages point out that fairness predicts students’ grades as well as their satisfaction in college. In the wild, Sapolsky describes baboons grooming those who are unfairly picked on. In classrooms, students who score higher on civic strengths such as leadership and fairness are more popular, even then their classmates high in love and kindness, according to Park and Peterson.

Fairness was so highly valued by the Greeks and Romans they clothed her in a stola, gave her scales and a cornucopia and made her a goddess. When people became too violent and ruled by self-interest and all the other gods abandoned the earth, Astraea, the Greek’s “star maiden” was the last of the immortals to leave. She stayed to plead for fairness among humankind. Fairness is so highly valued by monkeys that they will reject tasty, but inequitable rewards. According to Frans de Waal, some chimpanzees will even refuse to take the preferred food unless the partner also receives it.

What is this virtue immortalized as a goddess and valued by apes?

Fairness is related to justice, but it is something different. In the Nichomachean Ethics, Aristotle distinguished between legal justice and conscious justice, that is, between what is lawful and what is fair and right. When we are unable to manage a clash between a community’s rights or values, we have our laws to fall back on. But in a different time or context or place the laws might have been different. What is “just” might have been different. Æquitas (equity) on the other hand, the Roman Goddess with her scales, is what allows the law to be changed when there are circumstances that mere mortal lawmakers could not foresee. Fairness assumes symmetry and evenness.

Even then, we struggle with what is fair. Jon Haidt points out that both liberals and conservatives root fairness in reciprocity, yet it is expressed differently. “On the left, fairness often implies equality.” The wealthy and powerful exploit those at the bottom without paying their fair share. The right, Haidt continues, see fairness as proportionality: “People should be rewarded in proportion to what they contribute, even if that guarantees unequal outcomes.”

So courageous and driven by fairness, my 13-year-old son fought against perceived injustice even if so doing so was contrary to his own self-interest. Framed this way, what once seemed just querulous took on a new quality. Gandhi, Mandela and Martin Luther King Jr. all changed history by combining the same strengths.

Tripping over Fairness

But our strengths can sometimes trip us up too. What for one person may be a matter of fundamental fairness, to others may seem pointless or even seditious. Our strengths are not weaknesses. They really are strengths. However, Chris Peterson the principal author of Character Strength and Virtues, the “manual of the sanities”, stressed that we be attentive to the shadows that our strengths cast.

If fairness is the most authentic expression of who you are, then that is also the lens through which you see the world. You expect that others will treat you fairly. You expect strangers to treat one another fairly. But the world in which we live is not always fair. We do not all start at the same line when the race begins. You may get passed over for a promotion. You may be misled by someone you love. Others may take advantage of your kindness and trust.

Approaching the world as fundamentally fair makes us sensitive to when it is not. This is good and powerful and essential for proportionality and equity in our world. It is how laws are made and changed. It is what calls us to protect the vulnerable.

But if we are not attentive to the biases and wishes cast by our strengths, they can also blind us to other values that may be at stake. You might not see that there were other facts holding the scales in balance.

Keep Looking for Balance

Keeping looking for that balance. Keep and fighting for what is right. Continue to pick up the pebbles one by one and place them in the silver trays of Æquitas. Maybe this one is a little too heavy. Maybe next time we need to place two on the side that has been neglected. By so doing you bring Astraea back again. You express that immortal quality that holds us all together.

Editor’s Note: This article was commissioned to represent the character strength of Fairness in the book, Character Strengths Matter.

de Waals, F. (2011). Moral behavior in animals. TED Talk. The discussion of capuchin monkeys and fairness around equal pay for equal work (grapes vaued more than cucumber) occurs around minute mark 12:30, followed by a discussion of chimpanzees who will actually refuse the grape unless the partner also gets one.

On the day that I was preparing a draft of this article, the headlines on the front page of our newspaper included, “Toxic culture hits swim team,” and “Sticks and stones: schoolchildren explain bullying factors.” That bullying and toxic cultures make the front page shows how our communities and workplaces are increasingly expecting behaviors that are considerate, caring, kind, compassionate, courteous, polite, and respectful. We want people to be good citizens, to value and appreciate others, to take an active interest in the well-being of others, and to act responsibly in relationships.

We want people to be civil towards each other.

Civility is the subject of Christine Porath’s chapter in The Oxford Handbook of Positive Organizational Scholarship. She presents the state of empirical research into civility in the workplace along with a summary of the benefits of civility and the costs of incivility. She calls for more research into civility in workplaces, noting that there has been less empirical research into the benefits of civility than into the costs of incivility.

Benefits of Civility

The benefits of civility at work are compelling:

Positive emotions are heightened, both in the giver and receiver. A broaden and build effect takes place, as described in Barbara Fredrickson’s work on positive emotions.

When people are treated with respect, they feel more valued in their organizations, which in turn affects their ability to work well and contribute with energy.

Performance at work improves, both as people rate their work and as their managers rate their work.

Staff are more likely to be altruistic, courteous, helpful, and encouraging.

Staff are more connected with co-workers; they feel valued and appreciated, which improves collaboration, a sense of safety in the team, and comfort with giving and receiving feedback.

“Civility is the lubricant that fosters good teamwork.”

Porath also draws on a meta-analysis of a related subject, supportive peer relationships, which reveals that co-worker support provides a buffer in times of stress. There is a correlation between supportive peer relationships and improvements in attitudes towards work, performance, and well-being.

The Downside of Incivility at Work

The costs of incivility to workers include:

Negative feelings such as fear, anger, sadness

Intentions to quit

Reduced satisfaction with work

Loss of sense of meaning

Mental, physical, and psychological effects of stress

Feelings of threat, loss, and humiliation

“More than 60% of people who work in uncivil environments experience stress.”

“Over 80% feel used up by the end of the day.” (They feel emotionally exhausted, burnt out, with reduced motivation and enthusiasm.)

In a 2007 experimental study, Porath and her colleagues found incivility reduced people’s work performance, creativity, and collaboration. “Even with one-time, relatively low-intensity incidents [of incivility], participants who had been treated rudely were not able to concentrate as well.” They suffered short-term memory loss, recalling 20% less. These effects also occurred for staff who merely witnessed uncivil behaviors.

Interestingly, the study involved exposing participants to an uncivil event on their way to the experimental study, which demonstrates that acts of incivility outside one’s work unit can have a substantial impact. The implication is that a leader’s good work within a team can be undone by incivility in other parts of their organization.

In two studies where there were no acts of incivility, 90% and 73% of participants respectively offered to help others. However, when uncivil events were introduced only 35% and 23% of participants respectively offered to help others.

“92% of customers who witnessed an employee acting uncivilly toward another employee spoke negatively about the firm to others based on this incident.”

What causes incivility? Porath offers ideas such as narcissism, aggressiveness, stress, low EQ, and people who suffer from social inhibitions. However, some people do not deliberately set out to act uncivilly. There are different cultural norms, and what is uncivil in one culture or workplace may not be viewed as uncivil in other cultures. The personality of the receiver might also play a role: people have different thresholds for tolerating uncivil behavior.

How to Build Civility at Work

Porath offers this advice:

Leaders set the tone, so they need to advocate and model civil behaviors.

Commit to a culture of civility across the whole organization. Make civility an organizational priority, set guidelines, teach civility, and create group norms.

We can also look to Chapter 29 of the same book on High Quality Connections (HQCs). HQCs are short-term positive dyadic interactions that result in the same benefits as acts of civility. In this chapter we can learn ways to improve HQCs, which also involves increasing civil behaviors. They include:

Be aware of the other person.

Stand in their shoes, see their perspectives.

Express appreciation and gratitude.

Have an attitude of warmth and acceptance towards others.

Offer support, care, help, and empathy.

Be respectful.

Be playful, and have fun together.

Heart and Soul

For a workplace to retain its soul, health, productivity, quality work, and strong team relationships, the building block is respect and civility. Each day, we need to ask ourselves: “How can I be an active participant in creating these important foundations?”

Looking for a Positive Psychology Course Near You?

If you are teaching or know someone who is teaching a course, please enter the positive psychology course information here for everyone to see! This is a public list, so please be aware of that when entering your email address:Enter Your Positive Psychology Course Info HERE